MUSIC MAN Rumor(s) or Truth?

[john grey]

I have heard many rumors about musical equipment manufacturing companies & some occasionally have interest as I had worked in that industry for a period of time. One rumor group I would LOVE to have some input on is the following re: Music Man:

Rumor #1
EBMM had made a significant issue over not using or selling any factory seconds or blems (blemished products).
When the SUB was introduced, the extra step of painting the neck was to hide the fact that those necks were roasted maple that were less than perfectly attractive (during this time ('03) the "roasted" neck was starting to sell). Obviously the SUB was a USA made product that was a lower price point and every effort was made to maintain production cost. Bodies were not shaped, very tough epoxy paint were used with limited selection, etc. Therefore; why would the extra step of painting the neck be utilized if not to hide blems?

Rumor #2
The SUB was withdrawn from production due to it's cutting into sales of the StingRay product (this may be quite factual). However with the introduction of both the SB14 and the RAY Asian products, with the same price-point as the SUB; the RAY may be cut (also in approx 3 yrs) IF it cuts into new product sales of USA-mfg StingRays (at their entry pricing).

I am normally not into rumors but I am rather interested if any TB'ers would care to venture any info on these issues.

Thank you.

[BigOldHarry]

What is your source? These sound like guesswork.

BTW: The "Sterling" thing, from what I understand, is just an extension of the OLP line that was closed.

[Melvin7822]

These all seem like wild speculation. My understanding on the reason SUB basses were cut from production was the growing demand in the $1K+ price point. Since the SUB basses were made in the same factory, production was cut to keep up with the demand for the StingRay and Sterling basses (which are still their best selling basses obviously). There's also no way that SUB basses had roasted maple necks as the roasting process would've driven cost up considerably. I would assume that the decision to paint the necks would've come about since it would be the least labor intensive method of finishing the necks.

Sterling by Music Man was created to expand their market share into the <$1K market and not impact their >$1K production at the same time.

[dmot002]

I can't see that happening. You still need to fulfill the needs of different players. Fender , PRS , Gibson , Ibanez , ESP ... Just to name a few all have and sell instruments for the Pro Player to the Begining Player .

[Modulator]

I may be wrong, but I don't think that roasted maple necks were offered until long after '03.

[Melvin7822]

Originally Posted by Modulator

I may be wrong, but I don't think that roasted maple necks were offered until long after '03.

In fact August 2010 was the introduction of roasted maple necks. Not to mention the roasting process raises the cost by at least a few hundred dollars from my understanding.

[parsons]

I own US EBMM Stingrays and Sterlings. I also own one fantastic 2 band, refinished SUB Stingray.

From what I understand/believe the reason the SUB was canceled mainly stems from the fact they almost lost/broke even on money with the SUB. They are truly the only variant of the real deal I have found that actually plays, feels and sounds like a standard issue EBMM.

Owners are still on their honeymoon with the Sterling by MM line but I'm not a believer. It's a nice bass for the price point but its not the same. You can take my opinion or leave it but I own more Music Mans than some people do basses so its not just one good axe I've fallen in love with. Every time I've picked a Sterling by MM up at GC, it screams different to me. I'd like to try one of the new Classics they came out with but havent gotten the chance yet.

And yes, I've owned and played OLPs. Some of them I've even been fond of, even more than the Sterling by MM line. My guitarist actually has a nice OLP that plays and feels great, minus the slightly twisted neck.

If anyone has a SUB Sterling they would like to ever sell, I will kill whomever you'd like in exchange for it.

[john grey]

Originally Posted by BigOldHarry

What is your source? These sound like guesswork.

BTW: The "Sterling" thing, from what I understand, is just an extension of the OLP line that was closed.

Unquestionably; it was from a discussion w/ a friend from CA. I
just wanted to see if anyone else heard the same stuff.

[BigOldHarry]

Originally Posted by parsons

Owners are still on their honeymoon with the Sterling by MM line but I'm not a believer. It's a nice bass for the price point but its not the same. You can take my opinion or leave it but I own more Music Mans than some people do basses so its not just one good axe I've fallen in love with. Every time I've picked a Sterling by MM up at GC, it screams different to me. I'd like to try one of the new Classics they came out with but havent gotten the chance yet.

Agreed. And what a *strange* branding decision - Calling your budget line of instruments the same name as your most expensive bass in your premium line... VERY odd.

[parsons]

Originally Posted by BigOldHarry

Agreed. And what a *strange* branding decision - Calling your budget line of instruments the same name as your most expensive bass in your premium line... VERY odd.

My thoughts exactly. It was bad enough when they used Sterling by Music Man and now they have gone and thrown the whole "Classic" thing in place. The other thing that bothers me is how many have shown up for sale since they were purchased with owners claiming how the Sterling line sounds just like the EBMM line. If that were the case, you wouldn't sell the 'Ray that you paid 500 bucks for unless you wanted/needed something totally different.

Strange things are afoot in San Luis Obispo.

Being a pro Sterling advocate, the budget lines name pissed me off a bit. For what I paid for one of my real Sterlings, I could have 3 of the budget units. It also produced hordes of morons on Craigslist trying to sell their Sterling by Music Man basses for what a EBMM Sterling goes for used....

[Caca de Kick]

#1 They were not using roasted necks way back when the SUBs were being produced. The roasted is a very recent addition (last year).

#2 Sterling Ball said the price point the SUB was at they couldnt afford to keep building them at that because the cost of wood kept going up alot. Didn't seem to affect the regular Rays, they were still selling tons of them.

[john grey]

Playing Devil's Advocate here....

If you forget the "roasted maple" (period of time) issue - why would they go to the extra step of painting the necks on the SUB? Doesn't make sense when other methods would have been less expensive & faster. If they WERE blems, it would make a great deal of sense. Wouldn't they have several test runs of roasting before mainstreaming those necks?

Pulling the plug on the SUB line for an increase in wood cost would make sense IF the cost offset the profit margin by any substantial degree. But how much could it have risen?

Additionally, I don't recall ever seeing a maple fretboard on a SUB either.....Odd stuff.

[Melvin7822]

Originally Posted by john grey

Playing Devil's Advocate here....

If you forget the "roasted maple" (period of time) issue - why would they go to the extra step of painting the necks on the SUB? Doesn't make sense when other methods would have been less expensive & faster. If they WERE blems, it would make a great deal of sense. Wouldn't they have several test runs of roasting before mainstreaming those necks?

Pulling the plug on the SUB line for an increase in wood cost would make sense IF the cost offset the profit margin by any substantial degree. But how much could it have risen?

Additionally, I don't recall ever seeing a maple fretboard on a SUB either.....Odd stuff.

First of all, roasting adds significant cost to production. Second, it's much easier and less time consuming to finish the neck by painting it as opposed to the normal oil & wax hand finish.

As for never offerring a maple fretboard, that's not odd at all. It makes complete sense to limit options on production to keep the cost down.

I hate to accuse you of trolling, but that's honestly what this seems like. I doubt that you'd actually post this on the EBMM forum.

[john grey]

No, honestly I'm not.
It's (IMO) not appropriate for the EBMM..... BECAUSE it was BS rumor. I got an email & a related conversion & some of it (superficially) made sense. I believe it to be a miscellaneous topic. If it's wild rumor BS; so be it. I have nothing to prove by asking; it's simple conversation; certainly not directed info.

However an oil/wax (or any) hand finish doesn't seem as inexpensive as a urethane spray after sanding. BOTH concepts (black paint/clear finish) could be similar in cost; yet one obscures the view. I have nothing to prove from this; I own a SUB and like it. Yet it's withdrawal from sale could raise some reasonable questions. I wouldn't consider that trolling. However I'm frankly not wed to any "clandestine" explanation in any event.

It's a simple very open discussion of what could certainly be BS rumor & appropriately needs to be called Rumor in a query away from substantiated MM discussion.
In fact by addressing this in an open minded platform, the fact that it's a rumor and could be put away is more productive than not addressing it.....just my opinion.

EDIT:
Realistically, I don't even like the idea that I may appear "defending" it - as I am NOT. Yet there are elements that are questionable in an industry filled with odd decisions.

[dave64o]

Interesting thoughts. I'll bet they'd be GREAT questions to ask on the Music Man forums.

EDIT - Note that I'm adding the smileys here: After I thought about my original post, I couldn't let you go do that. You'd most likely get ripped apart there, especially for #1.

[73jbass]

Originally Posted by john grey

No, honestly I'm not.
It's (IMO) not appropriate for the EBMM..... BECAUSE it was BS rumor. I got an email & a related conversion & some of it (superficially) made sense. I believe it to be a miscellaneous topic. If it's wild rumor BS; so be it. I have nothing to prove by asking; it's simple conversation; certainly not directed info.

However an oil/wax (or any) hand finish doesn't seem as inexpensive as a urethane spray after sanding. BOTH concepts (black paint/clear finish) could be similar in cost; yet one obscures the view. I have nothing to prove from this; I own a SUB and like it. Yet it's withdrawal from sale could raise some reasonable questions. I wouldn't consider that trolling. However I'm frankly not wed to any "clandestine" explanation in any event.

It's a simple very open discussion of what could certainly be BS rumor & appropriately needs to be called Rumor in a query away from substantiated MM discussion.
In fact by addressing this in an open minded platform, the fact that it's a rumor and could be put away is more productive than not addressing it.....just my opinion.

EDIT:
Realistically, I don't even like the idea that I may appear "defending" it - as I am NOT. Yet there are elements that are questionable in an industry filled with odd decisions.

"Doesn't seem as inexpensive" and"could be similar" are the key words. Unless you are actually making them,you really don't know what it costs to do the work. Pure speculation.

[Thornton Davis]

Originally Posted by john grey

I have heard many rumors about musical equipment manufacturing companies & some occasionally have interest as I had worked in that industry for a period of time. One rumor group I would LOVE to have some input on is the following re: Music Man:

Rumor #1
EBMM had made a significant issue over not using or selling any factory seconds or blems (blemished products).
When the SUB was introduced, the extra step of painting the neck was to hide the fact that those necks were roasted maple that were less than perfectly attractive (during this time ('03) the "roasted" neck was starting to sell). Obviously the SUB was a USA made product that was a lower price point and every effort was made to maintain production cost. Bodies were not shaped, very tough epoxy paint were used with limited selection, etc. Therefore; why would the extra step of painting the neck be utilized if not to hide blems?

Rumor #2
The SUB was withdrawn from production due to it's cutting into sales of the StingRay product (this may be quite factual). However with the introduction of both the SB14 and the RAY Asian products, with the same price-point as the SUB; the RAY may be cut (also in approx 3 yrs) IF it cuts into new product sales of USA-mfg StingRays (at their entry pricing).

I am normally not into rumors but I am rather interested if any TB'ers would care to venture any info on these issues.

Thank you.

Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

Oh I know, if you haven't heard a good rumor lately, start one.

TD

[pudgychef]

Originally Posted by Modulator

I may be wrong, but I don't think that roasted maple necks were offered until long after '03.

Originally Posted by Caca de Kick

#1 They were not using roasted necks way back when the SUBs were being produced. The roasted is a very recent addition (last year).

#2 Sterling Ball said the price point the SUB was at they couldnt afford to keep building them at that because the cost of wood kept going up alot. Didn't seem to affect the regular Rays, they were still selling tons of them.

^^^ bingo on both.....lol to the roasted neck rumour

for the SUBs - - I have read Sterling Ball's posts stating the exact same thing....something to the effect that he may has well tucked a $100 bill into each case as he was already losing cash on the last year's worth (but needed to fill orders)